I do not think it is a crazy position so much as wrong. I argued back in the spring that the presence of the US military was making things worse not better. It seems clear to everyone including Bush at this point that the question is when no if the US will be leaving. Hence why there is so much intercene violence: there is a lot of jockeying for who will have power once the US leaves.
Increasing troop levels may help secure US forces but it will only prolong the evitable consolidation of deep rooted Iraqi power bloc. The longer the US stays the more likely it is that it is going to be a theologically based power bloc as they are the only ones delivering social services. The longer they can perform this role the more entrenched they are going to be. It may be the case that the point of no return has already been reached on this score.
But that is besides the point: the US can do nothing in either case. Iraq is a loss. The question is how much worse the Americans' want to make Iraq which is pretty hard because the first hand accounts I am getting from my Iraqi friends is expressed in tears not in sentences. I say again: Iraq is lost for at least one if not two generations. The longer the US stays the longer they delay consolidation and reconstruction.
Travis